





■ 



■ 

TO. ; I 

■ ■ 




■ 



■ 



1 1 : 



r ^,;- 









■ 



HI 

■ 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



DDDDllOflTlE 










^o T 



«5<& 







Bureau of Mines Information Circular/1987 




Steel in Motor Vehicles 
A 35-Year Perspective 

By J. Weinberg, K. L. Harris, and G. White 



^^^5 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 




Information Circular 9175 



Steel in Motor Vehicles 
A 35- Year Perspective 

By J. Weinberg, K. L. Harris, and G. White 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
Donald Paul Hodel, Secretary 

BUREAU OF MINES 

David S. Brown, Acting Director 



As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has 
responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. 
This includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water resources, protecting our 
fish and wildlife, preserving the environment and cultural values of our national parks 
and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recrea- 
tion. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resources and works to assure 
that their development is in the best interests of all our people. The Department also 
has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people 
who live in island territories under U.S. administration. 

(A<P 



^U 









Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data 



Weinberg, J. (Joan) 

Steel in motor vehicles. 

(Information circular ; 9175 ) 
Bibliography: p. 10 
Supt. of Docs, no.: 128.27: 



1. Steel industry and trade— United States. 2. Automobiles— United States— Materials 
I. Harris. K. (Keith) L. II. White, G. (George). Ill Title. IV. Series: Information circular 
(United States. Bureau of Mines' ; 9175 



TN295.U4 [HD9515] 622 s [338.47629232] 87-600384 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S Government Printing Office 
Washington. DC 20402 



Ill 



CONTENTS 



Abstract 1 

Summary 2 

Introduction 2 

Background 3 

Methodology 3 

1950-72 trends 4 

Imports 4 

Substitute materials 5 

1973-85 trends 6 



Page 

Imports 6 

Downsizing 7 

Substitute materials 7 

Outlook 7 

Conclusions 8 

References 10 

Bibliography 10 

Appendix— Assumptions and definitions 11 



ILLUSTRATIONS 



1. Materials used in motor vehicles sold in the United States 3 

2. Material flows to domestic motor vehicle demand 4 

3. Average motor vehicle curb weights 5 

4. Steel imports, by source, as percent of U.S. apparent steel consumption 5 

5. Materials used in average domestic car 6 

6. Comparison of automotive materials demand, 1950 and 1985 8 

7. Automotive steel demand and steel used per vehicle 9 



TABLES 



1. Motor vehicle demand trends 10 

A-l. Domestic demand for steel in motor vehicles 12 

A-2. Motor vehicle weight and content data 14 

A-3. Salient domestic steel and automotive statistics 15 



UNIT OF MEASURE ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT 



lb 


pound 






MMst 


Million short tons 


St 


short ton 


mpg 


mile per gallon 


yr 


year 



STEEL IN MOTOR VEHICLES— A 35-YEAR PERSPECTIVE 



By J. Weinberg, 1 K. L. Harris, 2 and G. White 



ABSTRACT 

This Bureau of Mines report presents data on the changes in the use of steel in 
motor vehicles over the past 35 yr. Sources of supply of steel for the automotive sector 
have shifted from almost all domestic in the 1950's to about 50% domestic and 50% 
foreign in the 1980's. Downsizing, design changes, and substitution of lighter weight 
materials to achieve energy efficiency also contributed to the market loss of the domes- 
tic steel industry. Although plastics and aluminum have displaced some steel in motor 
vehicles over the years, heavy low-carbon steel is now being replaced most rapidly by 
lightweight high-strength steel. If the percent of domestic steel used in motor vehicles 
had not declined since 1950, domestic industry would have supplied 9.3 million more 
short tons of steel than it supplied in 1985. Downsizing and design changes accounted 
for 43% of the loss; steel imports, 32%; and substitution of plastics and aluminum, 25%. 
In 1985, the total value of market share lost by U.S. steel producers was $5.1 billion, of 
which $1.6 billion was lost to foreign steel producers and automobile manufacturers. 
Through aggressive marketing and increased efficiency, however, the domestic steel 
industry may be able to recapture some lost markets, as applications for high-strength 
steels expand, and as foreign-owned automotive plants in the United States provide 
fresh sales opportunities. 



Economist. 
'■ Physical scientist. 
Special Projects Staff, Bureau of Mines, Washington, DC. 



SUMMARY 



Steel is the most important metal produced in the 
United States, in terms of both volume and value. The 
domestic steel industry has undergone drastic changes 
since 1979 in response to low product prices and industry 
profits; production has been reduced, obsolete plants have 
been closed, labor costs and the labor pool have been re- 
duced, and operations have been streamlined. Still, 
bankruptcies have occurred and losses continue because of 
low demand. 

Because many analysts, the Government, and other 
data-gathering concerns measure demand at the raw or 
semifinished stage, little is known of the long-term trends 
of demand for steel in final products. Moreover, for many 
final products, no data at all are available on steel content. 
The automotive market is one of the largest end uses for 
steel, and data necessary to determine steel demand are 
more readily available than for other uses. 

A review of trends over the 1950-85 period provides 
some insight into the domestic steel industry's plight. As 
would be expected, substitution for steel has taken place, 
but per capita demand for steel in motor vehicles has re- 
mained relatively constant because demand for automo- 
biles rose sufficiently to compensate for declining steel 
content per unit vehicle. Demand for steel in the automo- 
tive sector, however, has not kept pace with the growth in 
Gross National Product (GNP) or manufacturing. 

Domestic steel producers are supplying less of the 
steel required to satisfy domestic consumer demand for 
motor vehicles. Sources of supply of steel for the automo- 
tive sector have shifted from almost all domestic in the 
1950's to about 50% domestic and 50% foreign in the 



1980's. Other market losses have occurred through down- 
sizing of the automobile and by substitution of lighter 
weight materials, principally aluminum and plastics, be- 
cause automotive manufacturers were forced to make 
their products more energy efficient. High-strength steels 
have also replaced low-carbon steel to reduce weight and 
now constitute the fastest rate of material substitution. If 
there had been no decline in the percent of domestic steel 
used in automobiles since 1950, automobiles in 1985 
would have used 9.3 million more short tons of domestic 
steel. Imported steel accounts for about a third of the loss; 
steel substitutes for about a fourth; and downsizing and 
design changes for the remainder. 

While it is expected that there will be a continuing 
growth in market share of imported motor vehicles, sev- 
eral factors may point to a brighter future for the domestic 
steel industry. First, the decline in the use of steel in mo- 
tor vehicles is slowing and, may be reversed in the near 
future as applications for new lightweight high-strength 
steels expand. Second, the increase in the number of 
foreign-owned automotive plants in the United States, 
most of which do not use domestic steel to produce their 
vehicles, presents new sales opportunities for domestic 
steel producers. Through aggressive marketing and con- 
trol of plant efficiency, the domestic steel industry may be 
able to supply some of these markets. Additionally, the 
growing awareness of the domestic automotive industry of 
the need to improve quality and maintain efficiency in its 
operations could enable it to maintain and perhaps regain 
lost markets, potentially benefiting the domestic steel in- 
dustry. 



INTRODUCTION 

Steel is produced and consumed in the United States 
in larger quantities than any other metaL It is an essen- 
tial material in many consumer durables and nondurables 
and in the manufacture of most military hardware. Steel 
has played such a vital role in the development of modern 
economies that its manufacture in large quantities is 
viewed in most countries as a symbol of industrial, eco- 
nomic, and military power. Indeed, many developed na- 
tions, including the United States, have struggled for 
years to preserve and protect their steelmaking capability 
from a variety of threats. 

Despite the importance of steel, few data exist that 
measure the quantity of steel contained in final products 
consumed in the United States; it is not known whether 
this quantity is increasing or decreasing over time, nor are 
the causes for change known. The reason for this lack of 
knowledge is that consumption of a metal, such as steel, is 
usually expressed in terms of apparent consumption, a 
measure obtained by summing domestic production' (from 
new materials and old scrap), net exports, and net inven- 
tory changes. Apparent consumption, however, does not 
account for the metal content of imported finished and 
semifinished manufactured goods. In the case of steel, 
such imports have contributed significantly to the quan- 
tity of metal used domestically. As imports of finished and 
semifinished goods grow, reliance on apparent consump- 
tion as a sole measure increasingly understates consumer 
demand for materials, and masks the true requirements of 
the economy for these materials. 

The actual consumer demand for steel, the quantity 
consumed from both internal and external sources, pro- 
vides a more accurate measure of the market than appar- 

' In the case of steel, shipments are used instead of production 



ent consumption, thereby supplying the public and private 
sectors with more comprehensive information on which to 
plan investment, trade, tax, and other policies. Since infor- 
mation on steel content in foreign products is generally 
not available, total consumer demand for steel cannot be 
obtained. However, consumer demand trends can be ap- 
proximated by measuring the consumption of steel in a 
major, high-volume end product. In the United States, the 
largest market for steel is the automotive sector. In addi- 
tion, the domestic automotive industry consumes nearly 
half the imported steel. Analysis of the trends in domestic 
and foreign steel use in motor vehicles would provide in- 
sight into the changing importance of steel to the entire 
economy. 

This Bureau report focuses on the steel used by the 
automotive sector from 1950 through 1985 and analyzes 
the trends in consumer demand for steel from both domes- 
tic and foreign sources and the factors contributing to 
changing demand. The ability of the motor vehicle indus- 
try to sell its products and. concurrently, the ability of the 
steel industry to sell steel to the motor vehicle industry, 
are highly dependent on the underlying condition of the 
economy; sales grow during economic expansions and 
shrink during recessions or periods of little or no growth. 
Although this report does not quantify the contribution of 
the business cycle to changes in steel demand, the differ- 
ence between the maximum and minimum annual steel 
demand over the 35-yr study period is over 10 MMst. Coin- 
cidentally, the extremes occurred during a peak and a 
trough of separate business cycles (fig. 1 '. Eight ^expan- 
sions and seven recessions occurred between 1950 and 
1985, and the sinuous path of the motor vehicle demand 
plot correlates with the business-cycle plot. 



30 



KEY Coincident indicators: composite index for general economy 

Steel 

Domestic 




II 



150 



UJ 
> 

111 

_l 

(O 

o> 

II 

o 
o 



X 

UJ 

100 Q 

z 

UJ 

(/} 
o 

Q. 

o 
o 



50 



1950 



1955 



1960 



1965 



1970 



1975 



1980 



1985 



YEAR 



Figure 1.— Materials used in motor vehicles sold in the United States. (Sources: Wards Communications, Wards Automotive 
Yearbook, various issues; Motor Vehicle Manufacturer's Association, Motor Vehicle Facts and Figures, various issues; U.S. Depart- 
ment of Commerce.) 

BACKGROUND 



Steel is readily available, durable, ductile, easily 
joined and finished, and relatively inexpensive. It is avail- 
able in hundreds of alloys, and its physical properties can 
be altered to fit numerous applications. The automotive 
industry has been and continues to be the largest manu- 
facturing consumer of steel, receiving over 20% of domes- 
tic steel mill shipments. Steel is used in a multitude of 
automotive applications, but the largest use is in sheets 
that form the body of the vehicle. For this use, in particu- 
lar, the good finishing properties of steel and its ability to 
be formed easily with low wear to the forming dies are 
most important. Over 60% of the steel used in automotive 



applications is consumed in fabricating body parts. Steel 
sheets and strips, as well as forgings, castings, and struc- 
tural shapes, have applications in other automotive com- 
ponents in the engine and drive train, the suspension 
system, and other components of the chassis. Many of 
these components must meet different design characteris- 
tics. For instance, steel components in the engine are sub- 
jected to high temperatures and pressures and require 
more durable steels than components of the body. Engi- 
neers are able to select from a multitude of steel alloys and 
heat and surface treatments to meet these diverse design 
requirements. 



METHODOLOGY 



The domestic demand 4 for steel in motor vehicles (fig. 
2) is made up of (1) shipments from domestic steel mills to 
the automotive industry, 5 (2) foreign semifinished steel im- 
ported for use in the manufacture of motor vehicles, (3) 
foreign steel contained in imported motor vehicles and mo- 
tor vehicle parts, and (4) domestic steel exports that return 
in imported motor vehicles and automotive parts. In equa- 
tion form, this appears as 



' In this report, demand for steel refers only to domestic demand, not 
international or foreign demand. 

5 Including adjustments for shipments to steel service centers and distrib- 
utors, shipments of spare parts, and scrap losses. 



D = S+ I s + I, + L (1) 

where D = total domestic demand for steel in motor vehi- 
cles, 
S = domestic steel mill shipments to the automo- 
tive industry, 
I, = imported semifinished steel used in motor ve- 
hicles, 
L = foreign steel in imported motor vehicles and 
parts, 
and I d „ = domestic steel exports that return in the form 
of imported vehicles and parts. 




b oo 

KEY 

uS Mill products 
^P Parts 
A^o- t Vehicle manufacturers 



Figure 2.— Material flows to domestic motor vehicle demand. 



Because data for I„ and I, are not available, the follow- 
ing equation was used: c 

D = R • W • ttt (2) 



100 



where R 
W 



= total motor vehicle retail sales, 

= average curb weight of motor vehicles sold in 

the United States, 
=. average steel content, expressed in percent, 
of motor vehicles sold in the United States. 
Because the quantity of U.S. steel contained in foreign 
automotive products is relatively small, all steel in foreign 



and 



vehicles imported into the United States was assumed to 
be of foreign origin, or I,,. = 0. 

Two periods of time are analyzed, 1950-72 and 1973- 
85, before and after the oil crisis that precipitated major 
Government policy and automotive structural changes. Al- 
though the data used in the study encompass all motor 
vehicles— automobiles, trucks, and buses— the discussion 
focuses on automobiles, the largest single component. The 
assumptions, definitions, and statistical data appear in 
the appendix. 



1950-72 TRENDS 



The 1950's have been described by an automobile his- 
torian as the chrome age (i);* more appropriately, these 
years should have been called the steel age, in recognition 
of the average of more than 2,600 lb of steel contained in 
each of the nearly 70 million motor vehicles the United 
States produced during this decade. Although manufac- 
turers introduced changes in the automobile's outward ap- 
pearance every year, basic car design and material content 
changed little. 



6 Italic numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of references 
preceding the bibliography at the end of this report. 



IMPORTS 

In the late 1950s, U.S. imports of motor vehicles in- 
creased sharply as a result of trade policies, foreign gov- 
ernment financial assistance for automotive industries. 
tax incentives in the European Economic Community 
(EEC* and Japan, as well as increased demand for econom- 
ical, high-quality small cars. Imports accounted for less 
than l c f of U.S. retail motor vehicle sales in 1955; they 
were 9 r i of sales by 1959. however, and 13 r ; by 1970. The 
Federal Republic of Germany led the surge, accounting for 
at least 301 of U.S. imported vehicles between 1955 and 
1970. 



The Volkswagen, as well as many varieties of foreign 
cars that followed, frequently offered the American con- 
sumer a smaller, lighter, more fuel-efficient, and less ex- 
pensive vehicle. The 1960 Volkswagen weighed 1,700 lb 
and cost $1,600, compared with the 1960 American com- 
pact, which weighed 800 lb more and cost an average of 
$500 more (2). 

By the end of the 1960's, the compact car accounted 
for about one quarter of all cars sold in the United States. 
Domestic manufacturers met the challenge of lightweight 
small imported cars by introducing small cars of their 
own, but they were not as light as imports. Subsequently, 
heavy options, such as more powerful engines and auxil- 
iary equipment such as air conditioning, automatic trans- 
mission, power steering, and power brakes were added. As 
a result, the average automobile curb weight between 
1950 and 1972 fluctuated within a narrow range (fig. 3). 

Foreign trade policies affected imports not only of au- 
tomobiles but also of steel. The United States changed 
from being a net exporter to a net importer of steel in 
1960. The greatest amount of steel imports came from the 
EEC countries in the 1960's, but by the mid-1960's im- 
ports from Japan totaled nearly as much (fig. 4). Increases 
in imports, although largely unnoticed at first, in later 
years resulted in large losses of market share for domestic 
manufacturers of both automobiles and steel. The domes- 
tic steel content of the average motor vehicle 7 fell 28% 
from 1950 to 1970, while foreign steel content rose 40%. 

■ The average motor vehicle includes domestic and imported cars, trucks, 
and buses. 




Average ', 




Domestic autos 



Imported autos 



lS->0 19^ lHi>0 lSti-> 1 u /0 



l^HO l«tn 



YEAR 



Figure 3.— Average motor vehicle curb weights (weights of 
imported autos between 1950 and 1974 are estimated at 2,000 
lb). (See table A-2.) 



Total US 
apparen 
consump 



tjon 



& 



Imports, 

bysou < ce : :ra@0G 

: ; 'warn 



fee 



XSOfflQI-Js 



tfepatc 



aa*5JGra;&^^ 



z 

so O 

t- 

Q. 

E 

CO 

Z 
• O 

o 



m 



*d 



A. 



YEAR 



Figure 4.— Steel imports, by source, as percent of U.S. appar- 
ent steel consumption. (Sources: World Steel Trade Develop- 
ments, 1960-83: A Statistical Analysis, OECD, 1985, Paris, p. 
24; American Iron and Steel Institute, Annual Statistical Report, 
1985.) 



SUBSTITUTE MATERIALS 

Not only was foreign steel replacing domestic steel, 
but substitutes began to make inroads in the quantity of 
steel consumed as well. Between 1965 and 1970, the quan- 
tity of plastic in the average vehicle more than tripled, 
growing from 29 to 99 lb (see figure 5 and table A-2). 
Plastics long had been considered a low-cost, low-perform- 
ance substitute, used mostly for disposable goods markets. 
Intensive research in previous decades, however, began to 
pay off in new materials that were more lasting than their 
predecessors and that could be introduced economically 
into the automotive manufacturing process. The use of 
plastics for many automobile applications became attrac- 
tive because of high strength-to-weight ratio, formability, 
corrosion-free performance, and ease of finishing. In 1967, 
a new polyester resin was introduced that made it possible 
to paint parts directly after molding, reducing tooling 
costs by 25% and finishing and labor costs by over 40%. 
The net results were reduced manufacturing costs and su- 
perior material performance. 

From 1950 to 1970, as the motor vehicle lost 376 lb of 
steel, it gained 80 lb of plastic, 10 lb of aluminum, 17 lb of 
iron, and 214 lb of other materials. Foreign steel content of 
the average vehicle rose from 14% to 20% of total weight. 



o 

UJ 



4,000 



3,500 



3,000 



2,500 



2,000 



1,500 



1,000 



500 



1950 




1990 



Figure 5.— Materials used in average domestic car. (Source: Institute of Iron and Steel Scrap; data shown for 1988-90 are based 
on a projection by Ford Motor Co.) 



1973-85 TRENDS 



The average motor vehicle weighed about 3,800 lb be- 
tween 1973 and 1978. This gain of about 200 lb over the 
previous decade occurred before energy conservation mea- 
sures took hold and, in part, reflected increased emphasis 
on safety through heavier cars. Average motor vehicle 
weight peaked in 1976, but fell steadily through 1982 
when it registered 3,160 lb. Even though the average 
weight of imported cars rose, it generally remained lower 
than that of domestic vehicles (fig. 3). Average vehicle 
weight has risen since 1982, largely because fuel prices 
have declined and sales of lightweight trucks, which are 
heavier than cars, have increased as a proportion of total 
motor vehicle sales. 

IMPORTS 

From 1973 to 1985, the import share of U.S. retail 
motor vehicle sales continued to grow, rising from 141 to 
23% of the volume and further reducing the quantity of 
domestic steel required by the automotive industry. En- 
ergy conservation— more easily attained with the smaller 
foreign car— and the strong dollar in the early 1980's. 
played important roles in the dramatic rise in the volume 
of imported cars. By 1985, 3.6 million imported vehicles 
were sold in this country, with Japan accounting for 83' I 



of the import total." Despite voluntary export restraints 
agreed to in 1981, the number of vehicles imported from 
Japan continued to surge upward, resulting in a signifi- 
cantly reduced domestic steel content in the average motor 
vehicle. 

Imported steel, which accounted for about 141 of the 
U.S. market in the early 1970s, had grown to about 201 a 
decade later. Again, just as in automobiles, Japan has 
been the single largest source of U.S. steel imports for well 
over a decade, accounting for more than 401 of total steel 
imports during the 1970"s. In earlier years, imports were 
primarily simpler steel products such as bars and rods. As 
the Japanese steel industry developed, the composition of 
imports shifted to higher value sheet and strip as well as 
pipe and tube products used in automobile manufacturing 
(3). 

By 1982. the United States was the only major steel 
market relatively open to foreign imports (4). Both the 
open market and the relatively high value of the dollar 
fostered import growth. Hoping to stem the tide, the U.S 
Government negotiated voluntary limits on exports of 
steel to the United States through 1989 with 16 countries. 

" Statistics on U.S. motor vehicle retail sales include imports from 
ada as domestic vehicles. 



including Brazil, the EEC, Japan, the Republic of Korea, 
and Spain. Despite the limits, U.S. steel imports in 1985 
exceeded those in 1983 by 43%. Undoubtedly, much of this 
steel found its way into the U.S. manufactured automobile. 

DOWNSIZING 

Automobile manufacturers not only used lighter ma- 
terials in their attempts to meet the Government- 
mandated fuel efficiency standards,* but also downsized 
vehicles. Because many consumers continued to prefer the 
family-size car, downsizing required reducing the exterior 
dimensions of a vehicle, where heavy steel is used, without 
a commensurate reduction in the passenger or load- 
carrying capacity. In 1977 and 1978, General Motors re- 
duced the length and width of its full-size and intermedi- 
ate models, saving as much as 1,000 lb— mostly steel— per 
car. Comparable weight reductions were achieved by Ford, 
Chrysler, and American Motors. 

SUBSTITUTE MATERIALS 

By the late 1970's and early 1980's, automobile manu- 
facturers could use a variety of materials as substitutes for 
steel to achieve reductions in vehicle weight. For example, 
a bumper previously made from carbon steel could also be 
made from lightweight, high-strength, low-alloy (HSLA) 
steel, from plastic, or from aluminum. Substituting HSLA 
steel for conventional steel can achieve a 30% weight sav- 
ings; substituting plastics can achieve a 40% weight sav- 
ings, depending on the kind of plastic used; and using 
aluminum instead of steel can achieve a 50% weight sav- 
ings (5). Manufacturers look for a number of other charac- 
teristics in a new material besides lighter weight, 
including ease of forming and joining, durability, and type 
of surface. Cost also influences the choice of materials, but 
it is the cost of an installed product rather than the cost of 
the raw material that determines the manufacturer's deci- 
sion (6). 

During the late 1970's, high-strength steels became 
substitutes for conventional steel in the automotive mar- 
ket. Although developed in the 1960's, high-strength 
steels for the automotive market were not produced in 
large scale until the mid-1970's. Their use in the automo- 
bile more than doubled from 1975 through 1985, surpass- 
ing the growth rate of both plastics and aluminum. The 



effect of this substitution has been to reduce the total steel 
content of the automobile. High-strength steels, both 
HSLA and high-strength plain carbon steels, can be up to 
three times stronger than conventional steels. They are 
used in body or suspension members, and bumper rein- 
forcement bars. One problem in use of these steels, how- 
ever, is their lack of formability, a characteristic that 
declines in steels as strength increases. On the other 
hand, conversion to high-strength steels requires mini- 
mum retooling (unlike conversion to plastics), which is a 
significant advantage. 

The plastic content of the average motor vehicle more 
than doubled from 1970 through 1985 (table A-2, fig. 5), 
largely as a replacement for parts formerly composed of 
steel. Use of plastics in the automobile escalated through- 
out the 1970's, and by the early 1980's, two U.S. cars— the 
Pontiac Fiero and Chevrolet Corvette— had plastic skins 
over steel frames. Higher feed materials cost for plastics, 
low production rates for plastic parts, incompatibility with 
currently used paint systems, and the size of the required 
investment for retooling prevent the substitution of plas- 
tics for steel from growing at a faster pace. 1 " 

Although aluminum accounted for only 1% to 2% of 
automobile weight in the early 1970's, its share increased 
to more than 4% by the early 1980's (table A-2, fig. 5). In 
many applications, aluminum yields weight reduction 
benefits beyond those of HSLA steel and lends itself to 
conventional processing methods better than plastics. Alu- 
minum is more costly than steel, however, and requires 
more energy to produce. Furthermore, it has less strength 
and stiffness than steel, so a greater quantity of alumi- 
num must be used to be as effective as steel. Except for 
wheels, in which cast aluminum has replaced some fabri- 
cated steel products, most of the increased use of alumi- 
num has been as a substitute for cast iron rather than 
steel. 

As a result of these factors— the increases in imports 
of steel and automobiles, increased use of substitute mate- 
rials, and downsizing— the domestic steel content of the 
average motor vehicle fell 46% between 1973 and 1985, 
while foreign steel content rose 49%. Total steel content 
dropped from 61%- of the average vehicle in 1973 to 56%r by 
1985. 



OUTLOOK 



In 1985, net imports of motor vehicles and iron and 
steel accounted for 40% of the $125 billion U.S. merchan- 
dise trade deficit. The deficit in motor vehicles was $40 
billion— more than any other industry— and the deficit in 
iron and steel was $10 billion. It is unlikely that the use of 
domestic steel in the automotive market will increase in 
the next few years, despite the recent decline in the dollar. 
The Department of Commerce anticipates that sales of 
imported cars will increase 34%c from 1986 to 1990 while 
domestic sales will decline about 9%. Automotive imports 
will grow from 28% of ^he automotive market in 1986 to 
34% in 1987, and nearly 37%- by 1990 (7). 

H Title V of the Energy Poli'.'y and Conservation Act of 1975 mandated 
that automobile manufacturers meet a fleet-average fuel-efficiency stand- 
ard of 27.5 mpg of gasoline for automobiles produced during and after 
model year 1985. The fuel-economy standards for passenger cars were the 
following: Mode! year 1978, 18 mpg; 1979, 19 mpg; 1980, 20 mpg; 1981, 22 
mpg; 1982, 24 mpg; 1983, 25 mpg; 1984, 27 mpg; and 1985, 27.5 mpg. In 
late 1985, the Department of Transportation reduced the standard to 26 
mpg for model year 1986, and additional changes are being considered. 



Japan will continue to account for the largest share of 
U.S. imports, although the 1987 volume of Japanese im- 
ports is not expected to grow (7-8)." The United States will 
import larger quantities of automobiles (and thus steel) 
from countries relatively new to the U.S. market such as 
the Republic of Korea, Yugoslavia, Australia, Brazil, Ro- 
mania, and Taiwan. 

New foreign-owned motor vehicle assembly plants are 
locating in the United States. About 75 Japanese parts 
companies have plants in the United States and 20 more 
are expected soon, some as joint ventures with U.S. firms 
(9). Most of the major components and original equipment 
parts, however, are being imported (7) thus leaving steel 
import trends unaffected. 

As previously discussed, the declining use of steel per 
automobile primarily resulted from attempts to reduce au- 

"' General Motors abandoned plans for a plastic sports car in late 1986 
because the venture proved too costly. 
" See "1973-85 Trends" section. 



tomobile weight. Motor vehicle weight in 1985 was 24% 
less than in 1976, while steel weight declined 21% (com- 
pare figures 3 and 5). The percentage of steel in the auto- 
mobile in 1992 is likely to grow without a commensurate 
weight increase as a result of increased use of advanced 
high-strength steels, which can be made into lighter prod- 
ucts than carbon steels can. From 1985 to 1992, the per- 
centage of steel used in the motor vehicle is expected to 
increase to the levels of the mid-1970's (see table A-2) (10). 

In addition to greater use of high-strength steel, the 
use of plastics as a replacement for carbon steel in the 
automobile is likely to continue growing. Plastics have 
already displaced 7% to 9% of the carbon steel in motor 
vehicles and are expected to replace an additional 8% to 
20% by the year 2000 (11). General Motors expects that by 
1990 it will produce 1 million cars a year with plastic 
outer panels, in comparison with 150,000 in 1986. Chry- 
sler has begun a 5-yr development project to determine the 
economic feasibility of manufacturing a vehicle made al- 
most entirely of steel-substitute materials. The vehicles 
will have plastic outer bodies and composite structural 
parts, including frames (12). 

For the future, the automotive industry is looking at 
fiber-reinforced plastics for making components that must 



bear heavy loads, as well as a flexible thermoplastic that 
can be molded into body panels to limit damage in minor 
collisions (13). Du Pont recently unveiled a new plastic 
called arylon, an exceptionally hard material the company 
predicts will replace traditional steel in both automotive 
and nonautomotive applications and will cost 20% less 
than current products. 

A plastic sheet molding compound has recently been 
developed that can be molded into automotive components 
at assembly line speeds and which reduces cost and manu- 
facturing differences between plastic and steel. Its manu- 
facturer, the Budd Co., anticipates that use of the new 
material will provide a further boost to the use of plastics 
in motor vehicles during the next decade and eventually 
give U.S. automakers an edge over foreign rivals (14). 

In sum, total demand for steel in motor vehicles is 
expected to grow by 1990, even though use of steel substi- 
tutes such as plastics continues to grow. Demand for do- 
mestic steel for the automotive sector is likely to decline, 
however, as steel imports continue to rise. The increase in 
use of domestic HSLA steel is not expected tc compensate 
for the greater demand for imported steel in finished vehi- 
cles. 



CONCLUSIONS 



The changes that have occurred in the use of steel in 
motor vehicles over the past 35 yr are more apparent if the 
actual 1985 demand levels are compared with the levels 
that would have been attained in 1985 had there been no 



If the only change since 1950 had been growth in the num- 
ber of vehicles required, use of domestic steel in motor 
vehicles would have totaled over 16.5 MMst in 1985, more 
than twice the actual 1985 level of 7.2 MMst (fig. 6). About 



changes in the amounts and proportions of materials used. 43% of the 9.3-MMst loss was attributable to downsizing 



30 



Hypothetical demand 



KEY 



Materials other than steel 



Actual 
demand 



20 




Imported steel 



Domestic steel 



2 



Q 

Z 
< 

ui 
a 



10 






1950 



YEAR 



1985 



Figure 6.— Comparison of automotive materials demand, 1950 and 1985. (Hypothetical 1985 demand based on 1950 vehicle 
material content.) 



and design changes. About 32% of the loss was attribut- 
able to steel imports, more than 90% of which entered the 
country in finished vehicles; and 25% was attributable to 
substitution of plastics and aluminum for steel. In 1985, 
the total value of market share lost by U.S. steel producers 
was $5.1 billion, ,2 of which $1.6 billion was lost to foreign 
steel producers and automobile manufacturers. i: ' 

Domestically produced steel used in motor vehicles 
fell 8% or 0.6 MMst between 1950 and 1985, while retail 
sales of motor vehicles increased 112%, total material de- 
mand increased 86%, and total steel demand increased 
47% (figs. 1 and 7). In 1965, foreign steel used per vehicle 
was only about one-tenth the quantity of domestic steel; by 
1985, the two were nearly equal (fig. 1). In 1965, the quan- 
tity of all raw steel imports was 9.3 MMst; it had doubled 
by 1978, and almost tripled to 26.2 MMst by 1984. At the 
same time automotive imports rose from 5% of retail sales 
in 1965 to 16% by 1975, and peaked in 1982 at 25%. 14 

While the total amount of steel consumed in motor 
vehicles in the United States on an annual basis grew 
slightly more than 1% per year between 1950 and 1985 
(fig. 1), consumption per vehicle declined 1% annually over 
the same period. Demand rose from 9.8 MMst in 1950 to 
14.4 MMst in 1985 (table A-l), while demand per vehicle 
declined nearly 800 lb in the last 35 yr. Per capita demand 
for steel in motor vehicles has remained fairly constant, 
since growing motor vehicle sales volume more than made 
up for the decline per unit steel content resulting from 

'- 1985 steel price was $552 per short ton. 

" Loss of market would have been about 30'/f higher had scrap been 
included in the calculation. 
" Excluding imports from Canada. 



15 



I I I I 1 1 

Total automotive steel demand 




substitute materials and automobile downsizing. Demand 
for steel in the motor vehicle sector, however, has not kept 
pace with the growth in GNP or in manufacturing. De- 
mand trends diverge for the periods before and after the 
energy crisis of the early 1970's, with demand for steel 
growing at 2.4% per year between 1950 and 1973 and de- 
clining 1.4% per year from 1973 through 1985. Despite the 
negative growth rate for 1973 through 1985, average an- 
nual demand was still 30% higher than for 1950 through 
1973 (table 1). 

Although domestic steel producers had been losing 
motor vehicle steel market share since the 1950's, they 
experienced a trend of growing sales and shipments to this 
sector through the late 1970's, after which severe erosion 
occurred in the market. Steel shipments to the automotive 
sector reached a low in 1982, only 9 yr after the peak (fig. 
1). The growing trend in shipments through the 1970's 
provided only an illusion of well-being for domestic steel- 
makers, masking the magnitude of the changes in this 
market and the urgency of the challenges of the 1980's. 
Although the declining demand for domestic steel is pre- 
dominantly a problem of declining market share for do- 
mestically produced motor vehicles, aggressive marketing 
of steel products that meet motor vehicle design and man- 
ufacturing requirements is now being undertaken by do- 
mestic steelmakers. Another possibility for increasing 
domestic steel sales for domestic motor vehicle manufac- 
ture lies in the supply of steel to the domestic plants of 
foreign motor vehicle manufacturers. Without continued 
improvements and greater success in marketing by the 
domestic steelmakers, the declining use of domestic steel 
in motor vehicles is unlikely to be reversed. 



2,700 



1,800 



I 
O 
UJ 



900 




1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980. 1985 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 

YEAR 

Figure 7.— Automotive steel demand and steel used per vehicle. (See tables, A-1— A-3.) 



10 



. Table 1.— Motor vehicle dem and trends 

^ ~ im ^^^^^ZZZ Compound annual 

_J950-73 1973-85 1950-85 rate of growth, % 

— Mean Std dev Mean Std dev Me an Std dev 1950-73 1973-85 1950~8^ 

Other ma.ernl,... 5.7 2 1 9.5 1.5 69 ?.« 5 ^ 

Std dev Standard deviation. : : : — 



Booksa b 9 e 78:p R 20r lleCtOr ' S "^ ° f *« Aut ° m ° bile - B — 
2. National Research Council. The Competitive Status of the 
U.S. Auto Industry: A Study of the Influences of Technology in 
Determining International Industrial Competitive Advantage 
Natl. Acad. Press, 1982, pp. 72-73. 
3. US. International Trade Commission. Foreign Industrial 

USTT e r n p g M n i,?, S ^ feCtS ° n US - Indu ^ries, Phase I: Japan. 
USITC Publ. 1437, Oct. 1983, p. 196. 

4 U.S. President. Annual Report of the President of the United 
Mates on the Trade Agreements Program. 1984-85, Twenty- 
Eighth Issue. Feb. 1986, p. 39. 

5. U.S. General Accounting Office. Policy Conflict-Energy En- 
vironmental, and Materials: Automotive Fuel-Economy Stan- 
dards^ Implication for Materials. Rep. to Congr., Feb. 5, 1980, pp. 

6 Eggert, R. G. Changing Patterns of Materials Use in the US 
Automobile Industry. Mater, and Soc, V. 10, No. 3, 1986, pp. 405- 



REFERENCES 



look. p' S 36 D 2 ePartment ° f Commerce - 1987 U -S. Industrial Out 

^mgsLVssfl n are Keeps Gettmg Sma,ier - Bus - 

motiv S er e t r Tan G 5 8 :98Tpp D T P 39 een " ^^ ^ A ^ 
10_ Clark. iP, and M. C. Flemings. Advanced Materials and 
the Economy. Sci. Am., v. 255, No. 4 Oct 1986 p 53 

Se" in 3 ! 3 ^ 1 ^- M^ B ' ,*'"", I? e Challen ^ of New Materials. 
£. W 6 f:: e w~7t 3nd Mater ' alS - A »— «* Survey. 

Aug.' SSftm" Dnft of Th,ngs Mln - En ^ ,Ll " leto "- c O'- 

and sS^o 1 : 1% !£S££2£ als Usage Trends - Mater 

Oct 2aSS' S ' PartaM ' nUle Plas <" Challenges Steel. 



American Iron and Steel Institute. Annual Statistical Report 
Washington, DC, various issues 

DC^^tr Ind "' eCt Stee ' Trade - 1985 - W -h.ngton, 
Automotive News, various issues 

a/ 561 !'™ ;' P Fish ' and E Gillett - T »e European Car in 1990 
Metal Bull. Monthly, Mar. 1984, pp. 61-65 

Berry, B. Automotive Materials: Steel Holds Steady. Plastics 
Keeps Gaining. Phoenix Q„ v. 19, No. 1, Spring 1987 p 4 

Branham Automobile Reference Book. Branham Publ Co 
banta Monica, CA, various issues 

Compton ,W„ and N. Gjostein. Materials for Ground Transpor- 
tation. Sci. Am., v. 255, No. 4, Oct. 1986, pp. 93-100 

, C° ok * J - Th e Molting of America. Forbes, Nov. 22, 1982 pp 161- 
lo7. ^ 

Dean K. C, and J. W. Sterner. Dismantling a Typical Junk 
Automobile To Produce Scrap. BuMines RI 7350, 1969 17 po 
Dean, KG, J. W. Sterner, M. B. Shirts, and L. J Froisland. 

B^Tn^riS^X " ^'^ *-»* A »*™™<* 

Gjostein, N (Ford Motor Co.. Dearborn. MI). Private communi- 

R M n ' w °u 1986: 3Vailable Up ° n ret * Uest from J - W «nberg 
BuMines, Washington, DC. 

Gunnarson. S., R. Ericsson, and A. Steen. Automotive Materi- 
* ls - S /. c -'" Encyclopedia of Mater. Sci. and Eng. Pergamon, 19S6. 

pp. Z4t>— Zol. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 



Hu P. Motor Vehicle MPG and the Market Shares Report The 

™-963 X l.T9 n 85 h 74 0f pp 0del ^ ^ US ^ E "^ ° RXL 
International Iron and Steel Institute, Committee on Economic 
Studies. Steel and the Automotive Sector. Brussels. 1983 chs 5 
and 6. 

Motor Vehicle Manufacturers" Association. Motor Vehicle Facts 
and Figures. Detroit. MI. various issues. 
— -. World Motor Vehicle Data. Detroit. MI. 1984-85 366 dd 
N.emczewski C. The Changing Materials Content of Automo- 
i ? S ; i" The Im P acts of Materials Substitution on the Rea- 

dability of Automobiles, ed. by R. Blelloch. ASME L984 do 
11-3/. ' KP 

Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development World 

7o«t ?/, Devel °P ments - 1960-83: A Statistical Analysis. Pans, 
iyoo, loi pp. 

Sterner. J. W. D. K. Steele, and M. B. Shirts. Hand Dismantling 
of Japanese Automobiles To Determine Material Contents and 
Metal Recoveries. BuMines RI 8855. 1984. 25 pp 

U.S. Bureau of the Census. Census of Manufacturers, various 

issues. 

Wards Communications. Wards Automotive Yearbook Detroit 
Ml. various issues. 



11 



APPENDIX.— ASSUMPTIONS AND DEFINITIONS 



1. Net shipments of steel mill products to the automo- 
tive sector include scrap generated during production, 
steel used in spare parts, and accumulated inventories by 
motor vehicle producers. This report makes the following 
adjustments to steel shipments so that only steel actually 
contained in motor vehicles is considered. 

a. A factor for scrap is subtracted. The scrap factor is 
0.333 for 1950-70; 0.333 • 0.996586 N for 1971-85 where N 
= number of years following 1970. The annual decline in 
scrap is the result of increasingly efficient operations from 
1971 through 1985. 

b. A factor for spare parts is subtracted. The spare 
parts factor is 0.295. 

c. All inventories by motor vehicle producers are 
eventually sold and are, therefore, treated as equal to zero. 

d. The amount of steel going into motor vehicle ex- 
ports is subtracted. 

2. Some steel mill shipments destined for use in motor 
vehicles go to service centers and distributors. This report 
assumes the percentage of shipments going to service cen- 
ters, but eventually destined for automotive use, is equal 
to the same percentage of total steel shipments going di- 
rectly to the automotive sector. 



3. This report assumes that trucks use the same pro- 
portion of materials as cars. 

4. This report assumes that all steel in imported vehi- 
cles is of foreign origin. 

5. Passenger cars generally include station wagons, 
but exclude passenger vans. Passenger vans are included 
with trucks and buses. 

6. Shipping weight is the weight of the vehicle exclud- 
ing fluids such as gas and oil, curb weight is the weight of 
the vehicle including fluids, and gross vehicle weight 
(GVW) is the weight of the vehicle including fluids plus 
the payload. 

7. Data on curb weight of trucks were not available. 
GVW was adjusted downward based on manufacturers' 
estimates. The degree of error is unknown, but relatively 
small, since it affects the amount of steel in the average 
vehicle only marginally. 

8. Weighted average curb weight of motor vehicle im- 
ports was estimated at 2,000 lb between 1950 and 1975 
based upon available information. 

9. Retail sales of domestic vehicles include imports 
from Canada. 



12 



CO 


co 


CD 


CNJ 


O 


CO 


00 


CO 


.,_ 


CO 


o 

C\J 


CO 


■tf 


^f 


co 


CO 


en 


en 


CO 


CM 


CM 


CD 


in 


CM 


CD 


•* 


CM 


CM 


CD 


CD 


T 


CM 


<M 


r» 


■tf 


CM 


,_ 


CO 


o 


"•" 


CM 


CD 


"t 


CM 


r - 


CO 


«* 


CM 


1^ 


LO 


CO 


co 


CO 


CM 


^Z 


CM 


t^ 


h- 


■0- 


CM 


O) 


,_ 


o 


CM 


o 


*T 


CO 


CM 


in 


N 


* 


CM 



<B i; 



2 £ 



E = 



t r~- 


CO ■* 


00 


en lo 


■* 


CO 


CO CO 


O CM 


CO 


t- CD 
CM 


in 


CO 


1^- o 


CO CM 


o 


co r~- 

CM 


in 


,— 


00 ■* 


1- ■* 


CO 


i- CO 
CM 


in 


O) 


CO CO 


r- co 


o 


cd to 


-3- 


co 


CO CO 


<M CM 


,_ 


r- lo 


^- 


00 


CD rf 


m co 


00 


■* ■* 


CO 


CO 


CM r- 


O CO 


r~ 


1^ CD 


■* 


tv 


cn o 


O CO 


CO 


CO CO 


<- 


r^ 


O LO 


00 CO 


CO 


CM CO 


CM 


LO 


CO o 


en ^f 


in 


CO LO 


CO 


r~ 


o o 


o ■<* 


CD 


r~ to 


t 


r~ 


CM CO 


CM >3- 


O 


CM CD 
CM 


LO 


o 


O i- 


CO -*f 


CM 


T t 


CO 


CO 


■* T- 


r- CO 


CO 


r~ lo 


«* 


rv 


O CO 


O CO 


co 


CO CO 


CO 


in 


^r in 


co in 


CO 


LO *f 


CO 


CO 


,_ ,_ 


O CO 


00 


h~ LO 


>* 


r- 



•S E 

c 9- 



u; ro o a> E .g 

?. <2 o .2 "S c 

L r « a 6 ; o 

!n w i: ffl y ^ r 



" tS « 



CO CO > 

co W CO 



& B -j -i 



CD 
O 
CO 


o 
E 


en 
CD 

E 


E 
o 


CO 


CO 


o 




to 


to 


( 1 




CD 


CD 







i- 


CO 


cn 




o 


IS 


o 




1— 




CO 


CD 


o 




T ~ 




o 


LO 


en 




CD 


t 


CO 




CO 


^r 


(^ 




LO 


^ 


CD 






in 


r- 




« 


r^ 


CD 




O 


it 


LO 




t^ 


CM 


CD 




l~- 


_ 


CD 




T 


7 _ 


CO 




co 


„ 


CD 




f- 


^ 


c£> 






_^ 


in 




CO 

CD 


c- 


T 


c 


r»- 





CO 3 CO ■= 



c/> 



fc TO to 
en S o 

= 5 o- 
SgE 
i) LJ — 



CO ■■- 
CO 


T~ 


•* 


CO 


CD 


CO o> 


^ 


CM 


CM 


r«. 


CO r~ 
CO 


o> CO 
CO 


,_ 


CO 


n- 


-3" 


CO h- 


CM 


CM 


CT> 


cn 


co 


m cm 


,_ 


CM 


t^ 


rr 


co in 


CM 


T— 


0) 


CD 


CO 


t CD 


00 


a> 


in 


CM 


^t t- 


CO S! 


o 


o 


CO 


r- 


co t-~ 



<0£ 



5 

« CO 



CM i- O 
O t^ r^ 



moo 
CO o o 



to to 
55 



O ;= 



cq 








0) 








< 


CO 



0! 



0) 

C co 

Q. CO 

I 2 

•o " 

c "> 

e a 

CO p 



co en co 
co in co 

t- CO 



■^ co 


o 


o 


o 


■* 


LO CO 
CO 


^5 

CO 


CD 


,- 


CO 


co 


•g- r~ 


h~ 


" 


rr 


CM 


t in 

CO 


co r-~ 


CM 


T 


^t 


CM 


O CO 



o> -<r i- 

t\i t * 



i- r~ CO 



CO T- 

CO 


r~ 


CO 


O 


cn 


co cn 


CO 


- 


o 

CM 


<3> 


CO CM 
CO 


00 ^3- 

°vg 

CO 


CO 


f-. 


CO 


in 


CO CO 


CJ> 


- 


CO 


CO 


CO 


r» co 


,- 


in 


in 


o 


o ■t 


. CO 
CO 


CO 




CD 


CO 


•V o 
CO 


i- 00 
CO 


CO 


CO 


* 


CO 


h- CM 


^ 


r " 


^ 


LO 


CM 


•^ CO 

CO 


in 


CM 


Tt 


o 


in cm 


CO 


CM 


CD 
CM 


CM 


CO CO 
CM 


>- 00 


en 


O 


I-- 


CD 


t~- CM 


Kg 

CO 


00 


" 


" 


CM 


CO o> 

CM 


t- 00 


en 


,_ 


cn 


r»- 


00 CM 


g° 


CO 


T- 


m 


co 


CM CO 



^ to co co tn c\j 



00 t- 


m 


y- 


co cn 




T_ 


*" 


CM 


00 o 


o 


CO 


O CM 


en cm 


o 


P) 


"3- CO 




CM 




CM 



to to , 
5 5 



in Q 

1 * 

S 2 

^ ro o 

& <B ° 

| o £ 

E « 

® ffl ■!= 

o > <o 

JZ ^ to 



5 £ c 

>- O CO 

E£ f 

— O) CO 

2§6 



CO CO 



O) CD 
CM CO 
CO Tj- 



CO ^ 
O p3 



oo CO 

O i- 



CO CD 
O CM 



00 CD 
00 CM 
CD CM 



CO 00 
CO CM 
CD CO 



r^ cm 
co r~ 

O CO 



CD t- 

m tj- 

•- CM 



m cm 

CO CD 
CD TT 



to to 

O CO 

cm -*r 
cm' 



co tr 
in o 

CO CO 



CO CO 

cm" 



CD CO 
LO CM 
CM T 

cm" 

co in 

m t- 
^- in 
cm" 



in t^ 
o CM 

»- in 



< < < < 

2 2 2 Z 



CD O t- CD 

cm m »- ■» 
in r- 



< < < < 

2 2 Z 2 



< < < < 

2 -Z. 2 2 



< < < < 

2 2 2 2 



< < < < 

Z Z Z 2 



CD CM O CO 

y- m T o 
in r- 



< < < < 

2 2 2 Z 



< < < < 

2 2 2 2 



< < < < 

2 2 2 Z 



< < < < 

2 2 2 Z 



CO CO CO CO 

*- in co co 
in t 



< < < < 

z z z z 



< < < < 

z z z z 



< < < <a. 

Z Z Z Z 



CO CM CM CO 

»- m co oo 



cm r>- m in o> 

fc co t-' d oo 

"i 00 CM CO r- 

i- t-(\| ^r- 



t- in co •- oo 

fc CO IN CD CO 

l i 00 r- CM CM 

1- t- CM i- i- 



OlNOtO 



CO CM CO "- 



m oo in o 

CD 00 CM CO 

'fr in cm co 



o oo co r^ 



•- co -^r oo co 



CD T CO CO 

s to tt ob 

CM CM *- to 



Mnco s 



co h- in *- oo 

g r-. ^ i^. (D 

- •- >- oo 



CM "T CM y- 



co -c in tj 



CO Ol N N 

•^ t; ^: c° 

*- O O CO 



o o o o 



0) CO CD 

HE { 

"5 o o 

to Q u- 

55 



| 

jSc 



~ Es 



w ' *- r- ^ 

coi? = §2 
£: a. < ± O 



co E .£ to 



Z -o 

O £ 

"S CD 

to tr 



13 



o co 


<M 


CO 


CD 


ID 


CO CO 


CO 


■<* 


CO 




*"~ 


T— 








CT> C\J 


,_ 


r~- 


CO 


in 


cm co 


CO 


t 


CO 




*~ 


T— 








co o 


* 


m 


in 


CO 


CM CO 


CO 


-3- 


CO 




T ~ 


T— 








co o 


CO 


co 


m 


* 


CD CM 


T— 


CO 


CM 




CM t-- 


CO 


r-- 


CD 


r- 


CO CM 


LO 


^r 


CO 




*~ 


■" 








y- CO 


m 


CO 


CO 


r~ 


CM CM 


^r 


^f 


CO 




T— 


r ~ 








CD ■* 


o 


in 


o 


o 


CO CO 


CM 

CM 


CD 


in 


*~ 


CO CO 


o 


^r 


f~ 


CD 


i- CO 

CM 


LO 
CM 


r- 


en 




m co 


,_ 


T 


00 


CO 


y- CO 
CM 


LO 

CM 


1^- 


in 




t CO 


CO 


co 


t-- 


a> 


y- CO 
CM 


CM 


s 


LO 




CM O 


CM 


^r 


CM 


CO 


U"> CO 


CO 


LO 


t 




*~ 


*" 








cn o 


CD 


CO 


CO 


cd 


00 ■* 


CM 
CM 


CD 


in 




CM C- 


cd 


CM 


in 


rv 


CO ■* 
CM 


CM 


CO 


CD 




cm s- 


CD 


CO 


,_ 


m 


CO CO 


CM 


CD 


m 




CO CO 


s- 


,_ 


a> 


^r 


h- co 


o 

CM 


CD 


■<* 




LO 00 


CO 


r - 


,_ 


t 


■^ CM 


l«- 


u-> 


^r 




r ~ 


1 ~ 








CO -d- 


r- 


•cr 


,_ 


^f 


00 CO 


CM 


CD 


m 




CO t 


CO 


r- 


CO 


■* 


en co 


CM 

CM 


CO 


in 





2 xz 



£ £ 



2 E 



a) e a 



-?. _ "O 



cd t: — 'E 



CD 

E = o 

Q.'= CD 

Sfu 

CO CD > 

«2« 

CD CO CO 

co 



CO CO CO 
(O CO U) 
CD CD CD 



co E 



T- 


CD 


CM 


CO 


*~ 




T 


,_ 


r- 


CO 


*~ 




in 


en 


en 


CM 


CD 


ID 


h- 


CM 


o 


CO 


CO 


CM 


CD 


CD 


CO 


CM 


rt 


CO 


T— 


CM 


T ~ 




,_ 


CO 


CO 


CM 


*" 




m 


«* 


CM 


CM 


*"" 




CD 


r» 


T- 


T— 


'" 




co 


CO 


cd 


^ 


o 


CO 


o 


y- 


T— 




CD 


o 


CM 


CM 


*"* 




CO 


CO 


T— 


T— 


'~ 




r~- 


CD 


o 


,— 


,— 




en 


CO 


CO 


T ~ 


■>* 


CM 


o 


t— 


*~ 




^r 


^ 


o 


,— 


r ~ 





i- t- CO 



= -s CD 



9; co 

2 

O CO 10 

— co a> 

°= ra 

b co co 

O £1, 



CD tT TO (D 



CO 

- E 

CD LJ — 

rr 



O CO 



£* 



CM £ 



" <° ■ 



.- ,- . CO 



sz 

O) 
CD 

5 

2 CD 

.2 o 
II 



■tf CM 00 

^r r- cri 



nt-o 

CO CD CO 



sno 
in ^ -"j- 

CM I- rf 



y- CO CO S- CO CO 



CM CO 
CO'" 5 


j; 


«t 


CO 
CO 


CD CO CO 
r- <T 


O CO 


rr 


^J- 


CO 


n n s 


CD (b 

. in 

CO 


cn 


T 


CD 


CO 1^ CO 


00 o 

O ' 


o 


CM 


■3- 


CO CO o 



o co i- r^ i»- cm 



co o oo o r^ h- 



CO 


- 


in 


■cr 
^3- 


CD 




O CO 

en o> 

- in 

CO 


y- 


CD 


CO 


CO 


CM CM 


m 


in 


CO 
CO 


in 

CM 


O O 


CO CO 


o 


en 


o 


in 


in t 


CDS 
CO 


r^ 


in 


in 
co 


CO 
CM 


r- O 


h- o 

So 

- CD 
CO 


o> 


CD 


CM 


,_ 


CO o 


CO 


in 


CO 


CO 
CM 


-- o 
1- ■* 


O CO 


CO 


^r 


o 


CO 


o ■* 


CO 


CO 


■* 


CD 
CM 


in 

CM 


O CD 
i- CO 


St CD 

cd —: 

L' CD 
CO 


00 


o 


,_ 


,_ 


CO CM 


CM 


in 


CD 
CO 


CM 


CD CD 
CO 


CO CM 


^r 


t 


CD 


CD 


en oo 


r^ TZ 


CO 


co 


CO 


T- 


CO CO 



o m co 

i^ ■* cd 



P CM ^ 

in lo m 1 



m co co 
■- co CM 

t- CO 



cm in >- 

CO CO CD 



O 00 CM 
CO CM -r-' 



5 CD 2 

<w l9 



CD 
CO 2 

t: co 

Q. CO 

.§ § 



E5 

si 

b Q. 

CD p 



LO -* CD 

^r CD CD 



CO CO LO 
■^ CO CO 



r~ cm ■>]• 

co s b 

t- CO 



■>J- CM CM 
r-' CO CO 



q o o 

t- CO CO 



CO CD 

™ 5 

■ 2 2 

_ CO o 
™CD O 

5 o £ 

o > "> 

111 

>- O CD 

iof 

— CD CD 

S cd£ 



o co 

CM r- 
CD CD 



O CO 



O CD 

in cm 

CD CD 



1^ CD 

cm in 



LO O 
CD CD 
O CO 



CD CO 

■<r oo 

CO 1^ 



■* CO 
CD f^ 



CD CD 
CO CO 
CO CD 



S CM 

2 ° 
^f CD 



cn in 

CM CD 
1^ LO 



CO CO 
^ CD 



CM CM 

LO CD 



•- CM 

m co 



o h- 
CM CO 

m h- 



r; co 

CD CD 

co in 



CD 

2 "cd 

CO 
O CO 

to cr _ 

CD CD CO 

E '- 



CO y- >- CO 
CM -V CO CD 
CM t- it LO 



CD r^ ■<)• CM 

r- CO CO CD 

cm t- m- m 



cn oo -^ r^ 

CD CO 1^ 00 

t- t- -a- in 



CM CD 00 LO 

onios 
cm t- ■* in 



co co co in 

CD CM CD in 
t- i- t* m 



N O) S O 
CD CM 1^ in 

y- t- ■* in 



CD r- O LO 

00 CM t- t- 

t- t- m co 



in f co in 

00 t- CM CO 

i- y- in CD 



Tf CO I s - CD 

N CD LO CO 

y- in CD 



\f 00 CO i- 
CO 00 CO 00 
t- LO CO 



CO O O t- 

inco co s 
>- m cd 



< < < < 

z z z z 



CD CM CD r^ 

CD CO -<t CD 

LO CO 



< < < < 

z z z z 



r- co r^ y- co 

S r~ cm r^ K 

" cn co lo * 

y- CM CO y- y- 



cn cn cd r*~ in 

S! cn co in cb 

~ co r^ in co 

i- CM CO y- r- 



CJ m yf t 
t-~ co m y- 

OJ CO y- y- 



o I s - r» o 

CO CD CM cb 

co o in cd 

CM CO y- 



cn oo y— en 

CD 1 ^ t^ C\i 
CD CO LO O 

CM CO y- y- 



00 CD CO CO 

^- N O) U) 

CO CM <• t- 

CM CO y- y- 



(\l OICOS 
Lti N N 1- 
CO CO ■* LO 

CM CO y- y- 



00 in CM CD 

co ^r cd co 

CM CO t- r- 



LO CD O CO CD 

TZ in co 't cm 

"". •* o ■* r- 

y- CM CO y- y- 

y- 00 LO CM -r-; 

S <»CO (ON 

u i CO t~- ■* LO 

y- CM CM t- y- 

t-~ CD f^ 00 i- 

2 CO CM - - 

" cm in tj- co 

y- CM CM y- y- 



r~~ co ■«■ -a- 

(OOON 
CM CO ^- CO 
CM CM i- y- 



O CO CM O 

CO ■* CD ■* 

CM CD CO r^ 

CM CM r- y- 



1^ 00 CO CO 

cd ^ sco 

y- CO CO LO 

CM CM y- y- 



rt O rt O 

CO S- CO CO 

O CO CO CO 

CM CM i- y- 



S COSO 

O CO if CO 

O CO CO y- 

CM CM y- y- 



CO CM y-_ y* 

O 't CO CO 

CM CM y- y- 



00 LO CD CO O 
S CO CO y^ CO 

1 I CD CO CO CO 



5 O 

Q LL 



* I 

|3i 

E to E c 
a>23 o£ 
■c a. < - O 



CD E 



O E JS Z. 

H CQ g.S 
cd cr o ° 
ac ll. o. 2 



ra 2 

CD CO 

55 g 1 

CD CD 

Is 

O CD 

r e 

Q. Q. 

CD SZ 

o „ 

CD CO 

2 S 
o o 

CD a, 
CO CO 

° c 



X) CD 

> a 

X) CD 

.g E 



XI a. 
cn .i 



"" CD 
CD "^ o *-" 

o ro 2 

if !■ 5 

co eg o co 
1 i CD o 

" CO « 

® s 

CO = 
»- CD 

o > 



% E 

z o 



.2 o 

to cd -; 

Z .9 | 

CO CD 2 

o co E 

c5o2 

o.s i 

z OT - 

CD E 2 



If! 

? a. cd 

v\E 2 
m co co 

m , 

fX o co 



E £ 

=> CD 

c S 

5 .8 

— TJ CO 

ii 2"° 

Z g.3 

£ c5 S 

c- = 

€ o« 

> = CD 

LO O >- 

00 ^ CD 

I XI CO 

i- O 3 

CD "• O 
y- CD CD 

^ ""° 

Sr c 

z CD .2 

!S > o 

So^ 

S°2 

CD t q. 

° .2 o 

X « to 
CD CD 

co E E ' 

m o D 



CO 

m . -D -D 

C CD 
CO CD^ 
CO CD 
O ™ <0 

SCO 
I CD JD 

S £ CD 



To ASS 



_ CD 

^ "in 

S ^ CD 

OC 0- CM 



en S.S 



-cr™ 
_o O CO 

CO ® CD 

co a c° 

• ^S CD 
O CD -t- 



E 9> 



o o 

Q.O 

E *" 
— c 

CO CO 

CD SZ 

"O — 

3 CO 



14 



l~ 



o 
O 



< £ <?£ 

<D 0) 

> 5 



— j* in c5* co — in 

1° c « ,„ "" <u <o 
I - — to 2 R »- to 



— to 5- to — to 
2 | » ra o i5 J5> 

£ m ™ ,a ~ CD ra 



t 10 >■ CO -. — in 

°2 „ o | «» 



U1 -n t- - 1 1J r 

fc co a. j= o <u 



en 



a. 

E 



.y g 6 

T£ ~ CD 



a> 



O p CD 

O a. 3 



2 < < < < 
Szz zz 



o < < < < 
co Z Z Z Z 



2 < < < < 



2 < < < < 

2z z zz 



2 < < < < 

ezzzz 



o < < < < 
2 z zzz 



f~ < < < < '-'-(oinifl 
ffiZZZZ "^ co co to ?- 



o mm s w 
mmstooi 

id id id iocd m in i/i >n in 



o<<<< o < < < < o<<<< o<<<< r-- o .- o eg to co cm co *- 
co Z Z Z Z coZZZZ ^ Z Z Z Z a> Z Z Z Z r-' n oo co r^ lor^aicdoo 



2 < < < < 
2zz z z 



g<<<< — <<<< 
-£ z z z z ,-zzzzz 



2 < < < < 2 < < < < 



2 < < < < 

10 z z z z 



^r < < < < 



o < < < < 



m < < < < 
6 z z z z 



2 < < < < 
10 z z z z 



■tf < < < < 
^ z z z z 



O < < < < 

"" z z z z 



in < < < < 

z z z z 



in < < < < 

■» z z z z 



2 < < < < 



•o- < < < < 

- z z z z 



O < < < < 

*- z z z z 



in < < < < 

z z z z 



2 < < < < 2<<<< 2<<<< 



CO CO CO CO CO 



(v CO i- i- *tf 

t- id ai -- id 
i — i — i — r-~ i — 



oo <c <t <C -< 
b Z Z Z Z 



•- MOO) >- 

to o o in tj- 
rv rv o to to 



^ < < < < 



oo r- it o t 
cm r- iv to i- 
n m in m to 



oo < -c < < 
■sr z z z z 



9 < < < < 

10 z z z z 



T < < < < 
.- z z z z 



O < < < < 

^ z z z z 



CO < < < < 

z z z z 



2 < < < < 
2z z z z 



m < < < < 
fjZZZZ 



»- eft co CD ^ 
snwito 
in to co to r^ 



92 < < < < 

""Cz z z z 



o < < < < 
in Z Z Z Z 



2 < < < < 
<° z z z z 



IV < < < < 

^ z z z z 



O 00 r- 00 O s eo eo ■» f i- 
ootointN"- r» to to r- co co 
ininminin T tt t t *r t 



cocdn-coco ^t to co oo co 

io'»»»» «r *r ■*)• t '^r 



■- o to •- v 
eg eg eg co co 



O) O CO CO CM 
m ■<* *T TT *T 



eg to eg o to 

Ol O) O 0> «- 
— — Cvj •- CM 



COCOCOCOCO COCOCOCOCO cococococo cococococo 



co co s ^ to cm co co *r it co co <t T in Tf m to io s 



e-. < < < < 



2 < < < < 
Szz ZZ 



tO < < < OJ 

- z z z - 



co t- to -a- co 

CO O O O O 

to in to co i> 

CO CO CO CO CO 



-OIOOO 

fltr v' m m 



r*- o cm i- in 

o o r- o co 

co co cm cm — 

CM* CM CM* CM* Ci 



2 ■- '-t eg to 

in to to to to 



to O Ol CO »- 
(D tD S O f 
0") CO N CO CO 



eo<" 
o w 

II 

3 £ 

to _ 

•o 2 

CD O 

c - 



cotootoco nontjn 



<r o r- co o 

O *- CO Ol s 

r-- co N to m 

CO CO CO CO CO 



CO CO O to O ^T 

k- O to O r» r-- 

co cvj ■- eg co cm 

CO CO CO CO CO CO 



(J 


=> 


_- 


■ 


JC 

— 


■ 
- 


5 


IB 

C. 


■ 


- 




■ 


JO 




jt 


- 


3 











3 


II 


■ 


U 


c 


SH 


n 



\T \T N ID tD 



cm o o eg co 

too O) S tt 
m cocos N 



CO to iT i- ^~ 

■- co i co d 



w vt o> men 

Olftl ID NO 
Ni-COOlO 



tn t co o o 

s to %t m to 



*- N- eg r^ r*~ 

to N Old "- 



co eg r~- co co 

in ih tt in in 



o co to CO CO 

oS it co to ^ 



n co cn o in 



■<j-'<rrf'<r'r vt m * \t m 



o o o o o 
o o o o o 
o o o o o 



o o o o o 
o o o o o 
o o o o o 





CO 

S 


CM 

CO 


N 

IV 


cn 
CO 


■<f to <Tt eg to 

SOIOIOO 

to co r-- to co 


«- CO CO 

co to r>- 


CO <- 

r«- en 

to N. 


^- in 
oo to 
to to 


s 


IT 

CD 


rv 
m 


CO iT O 

COS-- 

•- o to 




CO 

in 


X 
CO 


>* 


T 


^r 


^r 


T 


*r f ^- ^r *r 


tr tt ■»■ 


•C IT 


•<* •"T 


^r 


*T 


u0 


in in tt 


IT 


T 


T 


o 
o 
o 


o 
o 

Q 


o 
o 
o 


o 
o 
o 


o 

o 

o 


o o o o o 
o o o o o 
o o o o o 


o o o 
o o o 
o o o 


o o 
o o 
o o 


00 T 

cg n. 
o o 


o 

CM 


CO 

vT 


CO 


oo tr in 

CO CO OT 

•- eg eg 


CO 
CO 


in 

X 

CO 


X 

c 

T 



egcgcgegeu cgegegcgeg egCMcgegeg CMCMcgegeg CMegegegeg egcgcgegeg egegegegcg eg 



CO = 

CD £ 

CD S? 

x: _ 

S 2 



II 
3 a 



co co r- co r- 
co -^ f^- -^t eg 
m m to vo co 



Tf m N W 00 
n CM CJ N s 
co co co co m 



o co cm co -<-r 
ai cn -^ -^r *- 

co ^ ^ -^r cn 



CMCO S O f 
CO CO Tf CO N- 

->r m m to co 



T CO CM O CO 

(D CO S ^t CO 

co -^ m co s 



COCOCOCOCO COCOCOCOCO COCOCOCOCO COCOCOCOCO COCOCOCOCO 



co m cm cn -^r 
O) a in m cm 
co n- r^- ^j- co 

CO CO CO CO CO 



CO *- 0> F*-. TT 

oo) ^ con 

o co co cn co 

co" cm" cm" cm cm" 



o co 
o ,„ 

— CO 
X « 

— V ® 

05 

v ° 

x s 

o o 
C « 

w . 

+ U- 

m to" 
X 5 

»o S 

(MjOO; 

CJ> ^ C co 

- SmO 
c\. > '" - 



■ 



I » 

: o o 5 
::::: ::::: ::::: ::::: : 2 °° 

o-r-egco^r mto s co O) o*-egco^r mto s coo) o*-cgco*r mtoN co oi O'-cgco^- in.<i^o 
ininminin m m m m in to to to to to to to to to to ss n s s s s s n n co co co co co oo z_ — 
ocdoovo) 0)0)0)0)0) a &> a at a> 0)0)0)O)cd ooooco oo)0)0)0) 00)0)0)0) o 3 



15 



CO o 

o a- <s 



CO 



ro S -o 





0) 




co 


> 


to 


Z> 

2 


ri 


r 


E 
o 
"~j 


o 

Cl_ 
X 

CD 


\- 


ro 





CD 

> i2 



c ^ 



2 £ 



Ee«2£ 

2 Q. CO — O. 

3 £ (0 O £ 
< CO CO 







zz 


CO 










CO 

co" 





b 


o 

■D 


c 


() 


fli 


O 


CD 

E 




CO 


Q. 



CD 


CD 


fc 


C7> 


O 


a) 




t> 


c 




CD 


CD 




CO 





^t nn ntn ocomnco 
r- <tn oi * cn n <o w oi 
co co in co in ir in •* iri co 



■* co cm cm co t- cm *f co ■* Tj-^fTtmoo cd r- f» t-- cd ocinsn 



co cd co "3- a> 
cd m <d cd cm 

CD CD ^ CO LO 

>-" M-" cd" od co" 

LO CO O) CO LO 

cm ■<t cm eg co 



oi •* co n O) 
in t- O) cm oj 
oo o r-_ t-_ r» 
in" r-" T-" cd" cd" 
o m co if co 
°. "*-_ "l C T. "I 
co" cd" m* r-" cd" 



i- co cm in cm 

co s o s n 

CM CD O y- 00 

r--" co" t-" cm" |C 

N t- * O S 
CO ■* CM CM CD 



CM CM in CM 00 

CO *^ CO CD r- 

t*- -?_ I~~_ O CO 

co cm" in" oo co 

00 I"- CO CD CD 

CO CO CO CM CM 



o"> oo y- cd oo 
■«• in co co co 
o f- t cm m 
•v" oo" o" t-" co" 

Ot-c\ CM W 
CM CD CM t- S- 

cd" co" r-" in* co" 



CM CM CM CM CO 

S00*0) 
CD O t CO 0_ 

co" cm" o" co" ■*)•" 
in »- o i-- cm 

CM -r- y- 00 i- 



coio s r- Ol 
CM l-~ h- 00 CO 

LOcDOJS'- 

cm' co' i-" r-." o" 

CM in CO CD CM 
CO CM CM CM CO 



CD 00 i- CO o 

t- co t- r- co 

r- CD CO (^ OO 

m" cm" i--" oo" hT 

o m cd o o 

cd co t- t- co 

t^." co" oo" cn" cd" 



r- cd S- cd co 

t- t- r- cd co 

CO CD O C5 CO 

cm" o" co" ■<*" cm" 
o co in co co 

CM i- CM ■* in 



T cd in cd cm 

CM CM CD CM O 

MO "- ID CO 

r»" cd" co" cm" t--" 
CD in CD CM CO 

t- CM CO ->3* "t 



OCOcOOt- 

co cd co *~~ y~ 
CO CM r-- *ct CD 

r-" cd" co o" in 

CO CD CM CM O 

y- CO O CO CM 



ncoNooi 

OCO N ffl >- 

co in o i*. m 

cm" y- y- y- y- 

oan- sco 

COS0OXD 



CO CO rf 00 s- 

CD CO CD M" CD 

in *i- t*-_ cd oo_ 

co" co" o" co" oo" 

CM CO CM y- m 

co co co t- in 



NCDOIMM 
t-~ in CM CM CD 

co r-- o ■* it 

o" co" o" r»" cd" 

in o cm ^t cd 

cd co t- cm in 



CO CD ■* S CM 
O y- CO h- CD 

T-_ O CO CO_ ■* 

co" cm" co" 't m" 

OcM*it4 
NtOO) CO S 



S- CM CD O CM 
CM y- in CM CD 
CM h-_ CO CO CO 

in" t" cm" co" t " 

CO O y- TT CM 
CO CD t CO CM 



co in ■* co in r- in co ■<!■ in coiocdn s encos coco 



OIOOICON 

00 CO o o o 
o r-_ o o in 

CD" CD* i- y- in* 
h- 00 CO CO y- 

co ti- in co co 



CD ■* 00 CO CM 

^coO'-* 

cd co r~-_ m o 

co" y- O t- t- 

00 I s - *- CO s- 

CM CO CO CD O 

CO O T-" CM* O 



y- y- CO y- 00 
CM O O CO CO 

co o_ in co m 

CO" 00* CM" t" CD 
CO CO 00 y- yf 

f- o ■* o s 

t-" cm" cm" co" cm" 



co co in cm v 
cm in o in o 

t- CD CM y- in 
O" CO" 00" ("-" •<3" 
in CO CM CO CM 

in m oo co_ oo 
co" co" co" cn" h-" 



OcOCOOl "» 
in S- y- O Tf 
O S- i- CD CD 

■>i" o" a>" t" r~" 

CD CO CD in 1 

oo co co o o 



CO CO CM CM CO 

y- CD 00 O CD 

in m r-- cm cd 

CD* S* CM CD* CD" 

CO CD O CD S 

O) ^J" N CO ^t 

CO* y- C*i CM »-" 



CM CO oo r- y- 

CD O CM CD CO 

in r--_ y~_ in co 
cd" cd" cd" cm" co" 

CD CD 00 CM 1- 
CM CD_ ■* r- O 

CM* CM* 00* CO* CO" 



t- co -<t in cm 

in cd in co cd 

CD CO CD CD CD 

cd" r--" co" co" co" 

y- CD i- 0~ CO 

S- ■* CM_ y-_ yf 

CO CD CD CD CO 



CD CD CD in CO 
CD cm in t-~ CM 
r * ID S CM 
r-" oo" CD* f-' CM* 
O t- O CO |-~ 
COMOCOS 



y- co in CO 00 

Tf y- CD CD in 

CO CD m CD o 

cd* cm* in* in" cd" 

O ■* 00 CM CO 

O CD CD CM CD 

CD* I s *.* CD* CD* O" 



in 

CO 
CO 


CO 


CD 

o 


CO 
CO 


CO 


CM 
CM 
CD 




CO 
CO 


CD 
CO 
CD 


CM 
CD 


CO 


in 

CO 


I-- 
CO 


LL 

a> 


T~ 


»- 


T- 


CM 


co 


co 


CD 

> 















CM O CM CO CO 

CD ID t- CD CM 

CM CD CO 00 N. 

CM* 00* CO* ■■-" CM* 

co cm o in in 

CM CD O t- r- 



>- CMCO CDS 
CO CO N to CD 
CO y-_ i- CM_ CM_ 
CD* r-" ^l" CD" O* 
CD 'f CM O CD 

co in oo co co 



M- CM CM CD O 

cm co •<}■ in r~- 

p- ■<}• CO 00 ^f 

CD CD 00 CO CD 

in CD CM S- CD 

CO CO CO CO CD 



tcosns 

^f CD r~- CO CD 
"} -- lO ^ o_ 
r~" 1-" ■*" t" t-~" 

i-BJI'-S 
S- CM CO CD CO 



CD 00 CO CO 00 

m <cr h~ y- co 
in o -r-_ T-_ ■* 
rC s.* o" h." ■*" 

COIOCOCOt- 
CM 00 i- 00 r- 



m co co co ■q- 
o co o oo in 
O CM CO CM r~ 
co" cm" k" cm" co" 
in in o o ■* 
n- K m CD o 



oo in oo CM CD 
i-ont s 
cm in •* t-_ oo 
cd" m" cm" in" ^r" 

f CM lOlO'* 

i- y- in in cd 



■* in co y- in 
co in co ■<}- o 

CD CD_ CO_ CD 00_ 

oo" cd" cm" co" co" 
in CD O ■■- CD 
O i- y- in CD 



O "t y- CO CO 

co o cm m co 

CO co_ cd yt r~ 

CD* rf CO CD co" 

r- co co ^ co 

Tf CO CM y- in 



CM f- O •* y- 
00 Ol ^ O) N 
y-^ C) CO 00 00 

co" in" n-" in" co* 

(ooicsios 

CO CD CO CO 00 



r~ o in co o 
co co in ^- cd 

Si-(D*01 
•<!-" i-" CD" h-" ^j" 
S- y- yf 00 CO 

^CD lO "t O 



00 CD tJ- 00 CM 

CM CD CD C- r-~ 

CO 00 00 o ■* 

oo" cn" cm" cd" m" 

CO CD CD CD CO 

co oo co o in 



00-sl-OO^i- incO^OCO CMCMCMCOin COCO ■* CD N 



CD CM 00 r~ CD 
CM N- CD CD CO 

y- s- in ti- in 
oo" r»" ■*" o" t-" 

O) CO O CO N 

sooo^-t 



O t- 0~ CD S 
ONCO CO^t 

■<j- m cd ■•- in 

in" o" cd" cd" ^f 

•* r~ co o co 

CD CO CD in CO 



CD CM CO CD in 
y- CO r- CO CO 

ion co N s 

I--" •>!" h-" •*" co" 

SXCDON 

co t- in r- t-_ 
h~" co" co" cm" co' 

t- t- y- CM CM 



r- t- r- CD CD 
CM 00 CO O CM 

oo m cm s t-_ 
co" co" t-~" ■*" cm" 
in ■* ■* co co 

CD_ ■*_ r-_ CD_ CM 
CD* CD* ■■-" P-" O 
S- 00 CD CD O 



O CO cm m CD 

00 t NOOCM 

CM -^ O CD CD 

o" O i-" h-" t" 

CM CO y- yf CD 

y- y? CO CO CO 



in co ■'t oo co 

y- CO CM CM 1 
CO i- O CO CM 

cm" m" co" co" cd" 

CM y- -t CO •* 
CD CO CO CO CM 



CD CO CO y- CM 
O CO CD CD ■* 
m y-_ yf O CO 
in" co" oo" cm" co" 

MOSCOS 

co cm_ o s- r~ 
co" co" m" cd" r~" 



CO CM CD CO S 
Tf t- O CM •* 

^ coin co n 



00 y- CM r~ CD 
S CO O CM CM 

in y- co in in 
cm" •*" t-~" co" cd" 
in i- cd co co 

COOIOIOS 



CO S- CM CM CO 

in o oo o i- 

CM |-~ CD_ CO CD 
CD" CO* T-" co" CM* 

in cm r- in cd 

IOCM CM lOrt 



CO CO N ^f CO 
CO y- CM h- y- 
CO CO O 00 CM 

cm" co" r-" cd" t" 

NcOCOOcO 

1-coosn 



CO f in MO CO S CO CD CO 



SCON lOO) OMO tm 

OIOO) SCO OOOOCDCOr- 

S C0_ h~ S <D_ 00 00 O O 00 

cm" cm* o" co" cm" t-" 7-" r~" in" co" 

S 00 in CDOI CM'irCMCM'- 

"JOl X ION N >-c\ t- CM 



■* CO "t CO CO 

cm ■* co -a- oo 
■* e» t- o co 
o" oo" *-" cd" r--" 

y- CD 00 CO CO 

coin i- eon 



r» CM y- CO CD 

y- y~ CM |-~ O 

co n oo n t 

cm" ->i" r~" cd" co" 

CM CO 00 CD S- 

t- CD ■* CM CM 



'tCMOt*- 001-TJ-O-* ^-CMincOOO OMOOICO 



smin cms 

o cd in «J- co 

cm_ oo r~- in cm 

in" cm" co" co" oo" 

t-~ CO i- y- CM 

TT ■* CM CM CD 

t s co n co 



CM CM t- 00 O 
00 O S CD CO 
CM O y-_ CO CD 

t" T-" o* co" o" 
y- m CD in CM 
CM CO "* CM CD 



CD CO CO y- 00 

00 O CD in CD 

CD CO CO 00 CO 

co" co" oo" o" cm" 

cm in CO CM CO 

■r- T-_ CM CO CO 

cm" co" cd" cm" cm" 



Ot-CM CO t lOCOMO Ol 

mminmin in in in in in 

CDCDCDCDCD CDCDCDCDCD 



O r- CM CO t 
CO CO CD CD CD 
CD CD CD CD CD 



in CD S 00 CD 
CO CO CO CD CO 
CD CD CD CD CD 



O y- CM CO -t 

r~ s- s- s s- 

CD CD CD CD CD 



lOCOMOOl 

s- s s- s- r«- 

CD CD CD CD CD 



O t- CM CO it 
CO 00 00 00 CO 
CD CD CD CD CD 





m 


cn 


I 




M- 


CD 


CO 


2 


CD 






CO 


01 


c 


ffl 


aj 


O 


CD 


CD 






tn 




T3 

c 

CO 


SI 
CD 
> 








n 








() 


r 


•> 


CO 


■n 







%* 



3 o 

O co 

C/3 cn 



li.S.GOVERNr-EMT PRINTING OFFICE 1988/207-618/80079/ 







- '^o< 








*bv^ 




o* C^N** 







C u ♦ 








"bv* 






^T. * .o v ^ *° • » * A 








1 ^ % * 








- * -y 





<> *'7VV* ,0 



► v \ : . 




















>9' 






















* • • • 



• • « ° aP 











,0* t .^..*o 



hi** 



















. 6 ••; . 







'••• 



^ . * • 



^ ** 




. , i • ^ 







*&K 














^ r . . % w 



,0 ^ * . , , • y O. * «, „ o ' .0 

%/ :*£fe\\/ .•^^: \/ .-ate; X/ 


















A c o " o „ "^ 



■ ■ mMm 




SrtKB 
■ 

■ ■ 






■ 






■ 

■ 
I I 



< V , 









I ■ 



■ 












■ 

. i . m u 






H 
V 



V 



"•**,<> 



/ : . 



;,-w 



